Evolutionist Discrimination in Public Education.

[jcrawford]

There are currently five categories which the U.S. legally recognizes in which persons may voluntarily identify and classify themselves as, according to their self-evident, self-recognized and self-identified common ancestral racial traits of national and geographic origins. None of these categories are Homo sapiens.

http://atlas.usafa.af.mil/meo/Discri~1.htm

http://www.withylaw.com/distopic.htm

http://www.wvf.state.wv.us/eeo/NO.htm

http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/dcr/Basis.htm

http://www.niehs.nih.gov/oeeo/national.htm

As far as the U.S. legal system is concerned, there does not seem to be any legally protected class of persons called Homo sapiens or any ancestral category of persons named Homo erectus from whom Homo sapiens are believed by neo-Darwinists to have descended.

Since it may reasonably be considered to be a violation of their civil rights to have their human ancestors related to, or called, anything other than what the U.S. Government recognizes as legally protected classes of persons, I respectfully submit that teachers and students in U.S. public school systems who publically volunteer to self-identify and self-classify themselves as members of any of the legally recognized and protected classes of persons established by law, may not be involuntarily labeled and classified as Homo sapiens in public schools without their written consent or the written consent of their parents or legal guardians.

Otherwise, if state governments continue to mandate and impose evolutionary neo-Darwinist beliefs and teachings about the human ancestry of the five legitimate racial catagories in which students and teachers have voluntarily chosen to identify and classify themselves as, then public school students and teachers have every right to sue the state for civil rights violations and a redress of racial and ancestral grievances.

[McCulloch]

Since most racial groups in America are on record as having declared their origin and descent from a supernatural Being, the question becomes inverted to ask which racial group denies it's origin and descent from a supernatural Being and insists instead, on asserting that all racial varieties of human beings in America descended from African ancestors? I would humbly submit that it is mainly white biology professors of European ancestry who try to impose their own neo-Darwinist version of racial ancestry on other racial groups in America.

I was unaware that science and religion in America are divided on racial lines. Is it that the people of African descent uniformly believe in a supernatural creation of their own species and that those of European descent are trying to impose their illogical and pseudo-scientific evolution of humans from non-human primates on the other racial groups? Is that your message?

[Grumpy]

jcrawford

Since it is not "contrary to their civil rights" for a racial group to "express the belief" and legal claim, that their ancestors were human beings like themselves and not some neo-Darwinist species of Homo sapiens or Homo erectus, any racial group in America is would be legally identifiable and entitled to "believe and have expressed the belief that they are descended from something other than Homo sapiens."

You can believe any stupid thing you like, if you believe it it's probably false, knowing your record so far. What superstition people believe is irrelevant to the facts(witness the flat Earth theory). We are all one species, there are no races of man and you continued obstinence in the face of all the facts contradicting your view says more about you than it says about the truth of evolution.

Grumpy

[Cathar1950]

jcrawford wrote:

I would humbly submit that it is mainly white biology professors of European ancestry who try to impose their own neo-Darwinist version of racial ancestry on other racial groups in America.

Humble is not the word you should use.
"mainly white biologist"? I would say that there all non-white biologists are either darwinst or neo-darwinist or hold some view or working model of evolutionary theory or they are not scientist but technicians.
This goes for whit ones too. I wonder how many Japanese or Chinese scientist are evolutionist? I would say all of them. Only in the USA would anyone be allowed to hold your view and be silly enough to not want it taught in schools unless taught with poor metaphysics.
Oh well, it is my country and I am grateful for the Daily Show and the Simpsons.

[jcrawford]

Since most racial groups in America are on record as having declared their origin and descent from a supernatural Being, the question becomes inverted to ask which racial group denies it's origin and descent from a supernatural Being and insists instead, on asserting that all racial varieties of human beings in America descended from African ancestors? I would humbly submit that it is mainly white biology professors of European ancestry who try to impose their own neo-Darwinist version of racial ancestry on other racial groups in America.

I was unaware that science and religion in America are divided on racial lines. Is it that the people of African descent uniformly believe in a supernatural creation of their own species and that those of European descent are trying to impose their illogical and pseudo-scientific evolution of humans from non-human primates on the other racial groups? Is that your message?

That's part of the message, McCulloch, since American education has it's roots in Anglo-Saxon culture, heritage and ancestral origins in Europe. Causcasian neo-Darwinist race theorists have been hesitant to adopt Neanderthals as their racial ancestors, preferring to label them and themsleves as of African origin, while denying the unique racial status of other modern American and Canadian Neanderthals.

Where are your ancestors from, McCulloch? Besides America, the UK and Europe? In America, if I were to classify myself as of Asian or African descent, for civil rights claims of racial discrimination, I'd be laughed out of court. Wouldn't you also be, in Canada?

You're not French, are you?

[Grumpy]

John

You don't have a white sheet and pointy hat in your closet do you??? You seem to be fixated on this false(more on that soon) view that you are better than all those ape decsended colored people and that the caucasions came from some other source.

Well(here it comes) DNA evidence shows no descent at all from the neanderthals, none nada zilch zero zip. We are all descended from a small population of Homo erectus which evolved in Africa and left that area 75,000 years ago, following the neanderthals who left some time earlier. All your racist theories are blown away by simple scientific facts. Now you have to learn to deal with the fact that the chimpanzee you visit in the zoo is you forty eleventh cousin. Can you say "ook,ook"???

Grumpy

[jcrawford]

John
You don't have a white sheet and pointy hat in your closet do you???

No. do you?

You seem to be fixated on this false(more on that soon) view that you are better than all those ape decsended colored people and that the caucasions came from some other source.

What's false about pointing out that only African people have a civil right to claim African ancestry and that only neo-Darwinist race theorists of various racial origins may label themselves as Homo sapiens? Non-Darwinists have the same right to establish their own racial origins as neo-Darwinsts do, don't they? Or shall we see you in civil rights court?

Well(here it comes) DNA evidence shows no descent at all from the neanderthals, none nada zilch zero zip.

Take your DNA and shovel it back where it belongs. Geneticists can be racists as much as anyone else.

We are all descended from a small population of Homo erectus which evolved in Africa and left that area 75,000 years ago, following the neanderthals who left some time earlier.

Garbage. Neanderthals never set foot in Africa. We are uniquely European even though H. erectus may be regarded as our African bothers in human morphology.

All your racist theories are blown away by simple scientific facts.

Most of your neo-Darwinist "scientific facts" are based on Anglo-Saxon race theories.

Now you have to learn to deal with the fact that the chimpanzee you visit in the zoo is you forty eleventh cousin.

I don't go to the zoo anymore, so how can I learn anything new about you and your chimpanzee relatives?

Can you say "ook,ook"???

Sure. ook, ook. What does that prove?

[McCulloch]

Since most racial groups in America are on record as having declared their origin and descent from a supernatural Being, the question becomes inverted to ask which racial group denies it's origin and descent from a supernatural Being and insists instead, on asserting that all racial varieties of human beings in America descended from African ancestors? I would humbly submit that it is mainly white biology professors of European ancestry who try to impose their own neo-Darwinist version of racial ancestry on other racial groups in America.

I was unaware that science and religion in America are divided on racial lines. Is it that the people of African descent uniformly believe in a supernatural creation of their own species and that those of European descent are trying to impose their illogical and pseudo-scientific evolution of humans from non-human primates on the other racial groups? Is that your message?

That's part of the message, McCulloch, since American education has it's roots in Anglo-Saxon culture, heritage and ancestral origins in Europe. Causcasian neo-Darwinist race theorists have been hesitant to adopt Neanderthals as their racial ancestors, preferring to label them and themsleves as of African origin, while denying the unique racial status of other modern American and Canadian Neanderthals.

Maybe I'm missing something. Why are we arguing about civil rights in the Science forum. Either Europeans descended from a common African human ancestor to all the other humnas or Europeans and Africans have separate origins. I should not be a matter of what the individual groups wish to think about their origins. It should be an objective matter of science.

Where are your ancestors from, McCulloch? Besides America, the UK and Europe? In America, if I were to classify myself as of Asian or African descent, for civil rights claims of racial discrimination, I'd be laughed out of court. Wouldn't you also be, in Canada?

I'm not sure what the relevence of this is. I believe that racial categorization for legal purposes is rather non-scientific and somewhat arbrtrary. It has been set up to deal with a social problem not a scientific one.

You're not French, are you?

Non, not that it matters. I have a colleague with the surname Campbell who is about as French-Canadian as you get. Campbell as a surname has Scottish origins.

[Grumpy]

John

Let's see if I've got this right. ALL the genetisists are racist and have a secret agenda to "fix" the evidence to prove their racist theories. And ALL the scientists and biologists working on evolutionary biology and paleoanthropology are also racist and also "fixing" their evidence to support their secret racist theories. There must be tens of thousands of these racist evolutionists conspiring behind the backs of ALL the people of the world to support their racist agenda.

Or, one John Crawford, who seems obcessed by his own racism(and homophobia), is trying and failing to paint everyone else his own special color,White Power Matte. It seems he is too good to have come from the same common apes as ALL the rest of Homo Sapiens Sapiens. He, and he alone, claims to have come from Homo Sapiens Neanderthalus, even though he has absolutely no evidence of that and genetisists tell us that that is nearly immpossible given the mitochondrial DNA evidence.

So which is it??? Let's have a vote. I vote B.

A. Tens of thousands of scientists with racist agendas, and keeping it a secret???

B. Or John Crawford's racist obcessions and delusions of superior genetics and general lack of any semblance of knowing what he's talking about have led him into the deep end of the (gene) pool???

By the way I do have one of those white suits, I ran one of them KKK loons down, beat the holy crap out of him with a ball bat, and skinned him on the spot. I now have it nailed up on the den wall as a trophy along with a photo of his bare butt fleeing down the street like a cat with it's tail on fire.

Grumpy :2gun:

[Cathar1950]

JW wrote:

Or shall we see you in civil rights court?

I would love to see that. They would laugh you out of court but you might get on "oddly enough".
Grumpy can you hunt me down one too. I would like to see a hunting season open just for the sport.
McCulloch sure sounds french to me.

[Rob]

There are currently five categories which the U.S. legally recognizes in which persons may voluntarily identify and classify themselves as, according to their self-evident, self-recognized and self-identified common ancestral racial traits of national and geographic origins. None of these categories are Homo sapiens.

http://atlas.usafa.af.mil/meo/Discri~1.htm

http://www.withylaw.com/distopic.htm

http://www.wvf.state.wv.us/eeo/NO.htm

http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/dcr/Basis.htm

http://www.niehs.nih.gov/oeeo/national.htm

As far as the U.S. legal system is concerned, there does not seem to be any legally protected class of persons called Homo sapiens or any ancestral category of persons named Homo erectus from whom Homo sapiens are believed by neo-Darwinists to have descended.

Since it may reasonably be considered to be a violation of their civil rights to have their human ancestors related to, or called, anything other than what the U.S. Government recognizes as legally protected classes of persons, I respectfully submit that teachers and students in U.S. public school systems who publically volunteer to self-identify and self-classify themselves as members of any of the legally recognized and protected classes of persons established by law, may not be involuntarily labeled and classified as Homo sapiens in public schools without their written consent or the written consent of their parents or legal guardians.

Otherwise, if state governments continue to mandate and impose evolutionary neo-Darwinist beliefs and teachings about the human ancestry of the five legitimate racial catagories in which students and teachers have voluntarily chosen to identify and classify themselves as, then public school students and teachers have every right to sue the state for civil rights violations and a redress of racial and ancestral grievances.

p1 There are racial categories (the number of categories is irrelevant)
p2 None of these categories are Homo sapiens.
c1 It is a violation of civil rights to classify someone as Homo sapiens.

Clearly, this is a fallacious argument. Premise #2 is false, and therefore the argument does not lead to the conclusion implied.

It is obvious that all known races and or artificial categorizations of ethnic groups applies to humans, and since humans, all humans, are by definition homo sapiens, it is fallacious argument to say their civil rights are violated by calling them homo sapiens.

What next, claim it is a violation of someone's civil rights because they are called a mammal?